Federal election reform can empower voters

By Michael Powell
Opinion Editor

This primary season has demonstrated that vast amounts of resources are needed to fund a campaign. This causes candidates to please donors and not voters, which weakens the power and importance of the vote.

As time wears on, only the candidates with the most money can stay in the race. Sustaining a nearly 2-year long campaign requires money from more than just individual donors. The length of the election cycle, thus, requires candidates to spend more time fund raising rather than communicating with constituents.

This need to both win the nomination and the general election presents a difficulty for candidates running against incumbents.

Incumbents, like Obama or in the South Bay, Henry Waxman, can save all their money for the months leading up to the general election and use government mailing lists to run effective campaigns. The playing field needs to be level for all candidates, incumbent or not.

In the recent Iowa and New Hampshire Republican Party primaries, the influx of money from political action committees has adversely affected elections.

PACs are organizations which corporations and unions use to fund political advertisements. Since the 2010 U.S. Supreme Court case Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission, this money can’t be limited.
In the Republican primary alone, almost $5 million has been spent in opposition to former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich. According to the Real Clear Politics poll aggregate, this money caused Gingrich to drop over 15% in the Iowa polls.

Unrestricted PAC money allows corporations, unions, and wealthy individuals, who are unaccountable to the public, to influence elections.

This need to pander to monied interests distorts the priorities of politicians and weakens the importance of the individual voter.

Without a doubt, campaign finance reform is needed. If there is to be a true “one man one vote” system, the focus should be on voters rather than donors.

Author Lawrence Lessig has come up with the best solution for this problem. Essentially, each American should be given $100 in “democracy vouchers” to give to a candidate of their choice with this being the only money received by candidates: no corporations, no unions and no individuals buying elections.

Based on past voter turn out and voter registration information, this system would raise just as much money as the current system, with the caveat that candidates would be courting constituents instead of special interest groups.

Campaign finance reform will allow candidates to spend less money and will force politicians to appeal to voters. By bringing an end to the corrupt financing system, politicians will be more accountable and government will be more responsive.